RE: Emacs 25.0.94: Is require failing to define macros and functions at compile time?

[Drew Adams]

> Any library complicated enough to have N `require's will by necessity
> have so many more lines of code than N that the longhand list of
> (require 'foo) will be negligible.  Doing it the simple(minded), obvious
> way has the advantage that it makes trivial things like grep easier.

+1

(Also, it's more readable by humans, IMO.)